High CourtsDivision Bench(1905) 11 MAD CK 0016

Ganapathy Ayyar and Others vs Chenga Reddi and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 1 November 1905 · Citation: (1906) ILR (Mad) 312

HON’BLE JUDGES
Moore, J · Benson, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 165 words
1.

We think that the decision of the District Judge is wrong. The case of Periatambi Udayan v. Vellaya Goundou ILR Mad. 409 is exactly in point,

and is directly opposed to the view taken by the District Judge. We think that the view of Section 258, CPC there taken is correct the only case

quoted by the District Judge which is in any way opposed to this view is Ramayyar v. Ramayyar ILR Mad. 356, in which the Court laid special

strong on the fact that a fraud had been practised on the Court. If that case is to be regarded as in conflict with the decision in Periatambi Udayan

v. Vellaya Goundon ILR 21 Mad. 409 as to the application of Section 258 CPC to a case like the present, we are unable to follow it.

2.

We set aside the order of the District Judge and restore flint of the District Munsif with costs in this and in the lower Appellate Court.